Moneyproject | ||||||||||||
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
||||||||||||
 |
[ Login/Subscribe ] | |||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
||||
 |
||||||||||||
Features
Departments
Opinion
Executive
Resources
|
Home > Departments > Methods & Means
Much as the popular book “Moneyball” demonstrated for baseball, the metrics applied in traditional project management are peripheral to success. Every project represents an investment, and yet most are not measured or managed on the basis of expected return. Here’s an approach that quantifies cost, time and scope into monetary units.
This is the second article in a series exploring, summarizing and expanding on the specific techniques, metrics and implications of a methodology called Total Project Control (TPC), which focuses on managing and demonstrating project value.
In 2002, the Michael Lewis book Moneyball became a huge bestseller. It told the story of how the small-market Oakland Athletics baseball team had managed to compete on a level basis with the richest teams in baseball, despite a player payroll budget that was 25 percent that of the top team. Billy Beane, then-general manager of the Athletics had accomplished this by adopting the player rating methods developed decades earlier by baseball statistician Bill James.
Starting in the 1970s, James had demonstrated that such traditional baseball metrics as batting average, runs batted in, fielding average, and pitchers’ won-loss record were fatally flawed, and produced distorted and inaccurate player assessments.
Please login/register to read the entire article.
| |||||||||||||||||
|
Privacy Policy Contact Us User Agreement